MONTAIGNE: A Life
By Philippe Desan
ISBN 9780691167879
Almost eight hundred pages, including just short of a hundred
of notes, divided into three parts and eleven chapters, this
biography was long in gestation, is minutely thorough and offers a
different perspective from most lives of its subject. In his
introduction, Desan discusses what might be called, without being in
any way derogatory, the standard view of Montaigne: the
disinterested man of letters, withdrawn to his chateau, remote from
the grubby affairs of the world, unmoved by politics and the bitter
clashes of his time, putting up with kidney stones and writing
according to his whim a more or less new form: the discursive essay;
exploring whatever subjects seemed to provide him with the greatest
opportunity for calm reflection on what it means to be human. Desan
acknowledges those biographers who have recognised the role politics
played in Montaigne’s life, including his writing life: Alphonse
Grün, Bayle Saint-John, Théophile Malvezin and Donald Frame. Yet
these are the few exceptions. It’s probably true that neophyte
students of Montaigne are introduced to the putatively
above-the-fray character and that undergraduate essays at least
(ironically) most commonly rehearse the idea of his charming
literary purity.
Montaigne came from elevated
Montaigne’s forbears were not literary or intellectual.
All the same,
It’s hard to conclude, therefore, that as a young man,
Montaigne had in mind to become a writer, or to pull back from the
world of power and influence.
“In my youth,” Montaigne wrote, “I studied for ostentation;
later for recreation, never for gain.”
He started as a show off, became a hedonist and expects us to accept
his studies were without calculation. Perhaps we should take the
disclaimer with a degree of scepticism: while it may be true he
didn’t expect any direct advantage from intellectual work, it seems
unlikely he didn’t imagine his education would help him follow his
ancestors into a significant position of local power.
Born in 1533, Montaigne entered the
One chapter of the 1580 edition was modified in a telling way
for that of 1582: in Of
Prayers, he made changes which tilted the piece towards
Catholicism. He tried, in the preamble, to place himself above the
bitter religious conflicts of the time. Clearly, he was taking into
account that he was a public figure and his writing not, therefore,
the work of a private citizen. Millanges advertised the second
edition as “revised and enlarged” (plus ça change). Desan remarks:
“The second edition… of 1582 should… be considered a political
document rather than a literary work.” Montaigne didn’t evolve a
literary strategy until he was taken up by the
Montaigne was an unflinching Catholic but a humanist. The
latter made him try to find the golden mean (the
aurea mediocritas of
Horace’s Odes, a
significant reference for humanist thinkers). Though the Affair of
the Placards, the Massacre of Mérindol and the St Bartholomew’s Days
Massacre were behind him by the time the first edition of
Essais appeared, the War
of the Three Henrys was yet to come and he wouldn’t live to see the
Edict of Nantes. He lived and was a leading public figure in his
region during a very dangerous time. It’s estimated some three
million people died in the religious wars. He played a canny game as
mayor. As he put it in 1585: “Outside the knot of controversy I have
maintained my equanimity and pure indifference.” His book, peppered
as it was with Greek and Latin quotations, was useful in portraying
him as a man of moderate judgement, erudition and non-violent
propensities.
In the early 1580’s Montaigne clearly intended to further his
political career. There is no suggestion at this time of withdrawal.
He may have written later, “All the glory that I aspire to in life
is to have lived it tranquilly..Since philosophy has not been able
to find a way to tranquillity that is suitable for all, let everyone
seek it individually.” Yet this is something of retrospective view.
At the time of the religious conflicts, a public role, even a minor
one, was hardly a route to tranquillity. By 1588, he was effectively
forced out of public life. He spent the last four years of his life
in his tower. His motto, or one of his famous pair, “I abstain” (the
other, of course, was “What do I know?”) seems most appropriate to
these final years than to the preceding five and half decades.
Montaigne had long been influenced by Commynes whose
Mémoires constituted an
original form; neither history nor mere personal reflection they
offer arguably the best testimony on the reign of Louis XI. Yet the
discovery of Tacitus dislodged the Frenchman from his pinnacle. The
historian of Tiberius enjoyed great popularity in the
Montaigne had a strong interest in history. A significant
proportion of his
library was historical works and he remarked: “History is more my
quarry..” He defined history in the broadest terms so it embraced
anthropology and all musing on culture. Paradoxically, this led to a
literary form in which history, in the strict sense, fell away, to
be replaced by the stories Montaigne had culled from his reading and
which in his essays became what Desan calls “the universalization of
self.” Does this suggest he was a far-gone egotist who recognised no
reality beyond himself? Estienne Pasquier wrote of him: “..while he
pretends to disdain himself, I have never met an author who esteemed
himself more than he.” This may mean simply, of course, that he
esteemed himself as an author. It certainly doesn’t imply that his
technique of returning to his own experience as the touchstone for
insight was the expression of a pathological inability to appreciate
the boundaries of his selfhood.
“Authors communicate with the people by some special
extrinsic mark; I am the first to do so by my entire being..” he
remarked. Desan thinks this is a tardy reflection on his own work
rather than a choice; that he did try to find his extrinsic mark.
Desan doesn’t argue so, but perhaps the form of the
Essais represents a
failure: they took their digressive shape and put their author at
their centre because Montaigne wasn’t able to work out a style
distinctive enough to make him a new Erasmus.
Montaigne’s first foray into literature, of course, wasn’t
original work but his translation of Raymond Sebond’s
Theologia Naturalis which
appeared in
In 1588, Montaigne spent a few hours in the Bastille. There
was ostensible peace between Henry III and duc de Guise but
nonetheless, the League’s hold on the capital put under threat
anyone who diverted from their extreme Catholicism. Though brief,
his incarceration was mortifying. It helped ensure his withdrawal
from public life. In the four years left to him he made huge
annotations to what is known as the
Bordeaux Copy. The 1595
edition runs to 408,790 words 22% added by hand to this copy. The
Montaigne of the commonplace myth is the one of his last four years.
Yet, though the additions and alterations to the
Bordeaux Copy were vast,
the essays were conceived and written, in their primary form, long
before events he had no control over made him retreat from public
life. This is, perhaps, Desan’s central argument: if we think of
Montaigne as a writer remote from worldly concerns, and in
particular, not interested in power, we are likely to misinterpret
the work. This is a book, however, about the life rather than the
writing. There is no significant discussion of the essays, nothing
that amounts a critique of Montaigne as writer and thinker, which is
perfectly acceptable in a biography.
Montaigne had his Max Brod. Marie de Gournay was born in
Paris in 1565, daughter of the king’s treasurer. The family moved to
Marie de Gournay was a remarkable woman: a feminist in an age
of absolute male dominion,
a writer herself, and in her devotion to the task of editing
, correcting and promoting the work of her adopted father, nothing
less than an angel. How much does Montaigne’s reputation owe to her?
His work would not have disappeared without her efforts, he was too
well-connected for that; but Desan says her encounter with Montaigne
“allowed the Essais to be “transported” from the sixteenth to the
seventeenth century.” Perhaps, then, Montaigne does owe something of
his endurance and significance to the efforts of a woman working
against the odds to make a contribution to the intellectual life of
her time; perhaps we should never celebrate him without also raising
a toast to her.
Henceforth, this book will be required reading not only for
Montaigne scholars but for anyone with a passing interest in his
work. In correcting the misleading view of him as a literary purist,
untouched by the desire for power or advancement, Desan requires us
to read the essays in a new way. Surely this will lead, in time, to
revised interpretations. In the meantime, immersion in the
extraordinary detail of this work is a delight, and a revelation.
|